Janissary
Re: The Ottoman Empire - Gameplay Discussion
A little note :
The Ottoman Army is divided into two armies :
Eyalet Soldiers
-Yerlikulu : Azabs (Bashi-bazouks are azabs), Müsellems, Lağımcı, Icareci
-Serhatkulu : Deli, Besli, Akinci, Gönüllü
Kapikulu Soldiers
Wangrin has further information about it
[post being built]
Wind from the East's Awards :
Unguibus et Rostro
Re: The Ottoman Empire - Gameplay Discussion
I've found an interesting book about Crimean Khanate :
The Crimean Tatars, Alan W. Fisher, Hoover Press, 1978
Tags : crimean khanate, tatars, crimea
Notes : history of the Crimean Khanate, from the mid-XIVth century to present.
Google book : The Crimean Tatars
Maybe should I create a thread dedicated to this faction ?
EDIT1 : an other interesting book about Ottoman empire, organization and economy
The Arab Lands Under Ottoman Rule: 1516 - 1800, Jane Hathaway, Pearson Education, 2008
Tags : Ottoman, 18th century, economy
Notes : description of the Ottoman empire society and relations between government officials, merchants and shopkeepers, peasants, religious scholars, women, ethnic and religious minorities.
Google book : The Arab Lands under Ottoman Rule: 1516-1800
Review :
The Arab Lands Under Ottoman Rule, 1516-1800 by Jane Hathaway is a survey history of the Ottoman Empire. The monograph emphasizes the study of diverse demographics and complex power structures that governed the Empire for 300 years. Hathaway's reassessment of the Ottoman Empire is contrary to current narrowly focused studies, either Arabic nationalistic or Ottoman centrist, and calls for a broader, more complex understanding of the dynamics of Ottoman imperium. This entire monograph becomes a driving critique of modern study while also detailing the historical narrative of the time in question.
In the monograph, Hathaway maintains that population diversity is overlooked by previous histories defining the Empire. She writes that the “complexion of 'local notables' varied from one province to another, and even from one district to another” and that “the demarcation between state and society was discursively constructed and was constantly being contested and negotiated.”(p. 9-10) Additionally “'demographic flux'... also characterized the region, with new populations sweeping in periodically from different directions.” (p. 34) Hathaway also critiques mono-thematic characterization of ayans as a isolated ruling class, championed originally by Albert Hourani in 1966, as “far too neat.” (p. 80) In line with other current studies of imperial history, the monograph maintains that the ruling elites were affected by their constituents more than previous historiography conceded. Hathaway's thus establishes an overarching theme of diverse, historically neglected groups that “played a critical, albeit frequently understudied, role in shaping [the Empire's] character.” (p.99)
Further, “neo-nationalistic” historiography has a “tendency to treat residents of the various Arab provinces as if they shared a tacitly acknowledged common identity.” (p. 246) Hathaway's work establishes that the Empire was not as simple conqueror versus conquered, but a vibrant organism with multitudes of varying interactions and people. For instance, “Turcophone Anatolians living in [Cairo] were not necessarily regarded as a completely alien presence,” as nationalistic theory would hold. (p. 247) She writes that “we should remember that the relationship between Ottoman central authority and any given province... was not a question of two rival power centres; rather, it resembled a dialogue or negotiation, with much give and take of personnel and resources.” (p. 112)
The failure to study marginalized peripheries in favor of elite groups is not new in Ottoman historiography. Specifically, Hathaway recalls “the 'decline' paradigm” that historically has been a central theme of Ottoman studies but since has been “cast aside.” (p. 89) She traces this theory back to previous historical study of “Ottoman intellectuals of the late sixteenth century” who believed “the empire was indeed in decline, and they wrote about their concerns” in advice literature. (p. 60) These authors led historians to conclude that after the reign of Sultan Suleyman I an age of corruption, military blunder, and financial collapse slowly eroded the Empire. As the 'decline theory' is based on accounts of intellectual elites it therefore becomes a hypothesis based on a demographic sampling error. Hathaway's monograph, thus, advocates diverse group studies to avoid such biases.
The Arab Lands Under Ottoman Rule, 1516-1800 addresses rather complex issues pertaining to the definition and taxonomy of empire. Much of Hathaway's work is reminiscent of Stoler and Cooper's Between Metropole and Colony in calling for a redefining study of the interactions between inhabitants in an imperial power. Therefore, the contribution of this work is enormous in the field of Ottoman history. Hathaway's inclusion of marginalized groups and analysis of the complex relationship dynamic between ruler and ruled is a valuable addition for Ottomanist scholars. Despite the survey style of this work, a fertile new field of inquiry has been opened. Intellectual, social, religious, and political history are all accounted for in this work. However, social history predominates and outshines the other fields. Further nuanced studies would strengthen her conclusions. Hathaway has provided the start, it is up to future historians to follow.
Zach Schulz's review
EDIT2 : A book about the rise of Egyptian mamluks
The Politics of Households in Ottoman Egypt: The Rise of the Qazdaglis, Jane Hathaway, Cambridge University Press, 2002
Tags : Ottoman empire, mamluk, 18th century
Notes : study about the mamluk Qazdaglis household
Google book : The Politics of Households in Ottoman Egypt: The Rise of the Qazdaglis
Last edited by wangrin; June 02, 2013 at 04:15 AM.
« Le courage, c’est de ne pas subir la loi du mensonge triomphant qui passe, et de ne pas faire écho de notre âme, de notre bouche et de nos mains aux applaudissements imbéciles et aux huées fanatiques.. » Jean JAURES
Unguibus et Rostro
Re: The Ottoman Empire - Gameplay Discussion
Discussion about Timar system (second farm building chain)
Timar :
From this document (Le timar dans l'État ottoman (XIVe-XVe siècles)), it would be possible to class timars like this :A timar was land granted by the Ottoman sultans between the fourteenth and eighteenth centuries. The revenues produced from land acted as compensation for military service. A Timar holder was known as a Timariot.
Wikipedia
- Military Timars
- Conceded Timars in exchange of mounted military service
- Conceded Timars to soldiers guarding fortresses
- Conceded Timars in exchange of naval military service
- Civilian Timars
- Conceded Timars in exchange of nightwatch service, forest warden, muhtesib, qãdi, imam, etc.
It would be also possible to class Timars depending of their fiscal incomes type :
- Integral Timar : Sipãhi benefit from all rights (common and religious laws incomes) except capitation ;
- Divãni Timar : Appointed benefit only from common law incomes
- Ser iyye Timar : Timariot benefit only from religious law incomes
But, if we want to use Timars to represent a part of the Ottoman military system, it would be better to class Timars depending of their annual incomes and defined during Mehmet II reign :
- Timar (from about a hundred to 14000 aspres)
- Subaşı (Soubachı) (from 14000 to 132000 aspres)
- Sancak Bey (Sa-nejak Bèy) (from 300000 to 437000 aspres), but Sancak Bey is a title and a generic term as Goutlard emphasized it.
So, I think that we should use a 4 levels system for Timar building chain :
- level 0 : farm
- level 1 : Timar
- level 2 : Subaşı or Soubachi
- level 3 : Sa-nejak Bèyli-i or Sancak Beyli
Timar chain building would be necessary to recruit some eyâlet units such as timariot sipahi.
A late period possibility would be to add a technology called "Çiftlik system"
Chiflik, or chiftlik is a Turkish term for a system of land management in the Ottoman Empire.
wikipediaSo çiftlik could be both a technology and a building, maybe a level 3 or 4 farms that would replace timars as well as farms.A çiftlik was composed of a manor where the landlord or his agent resided, a number of huts for quartering laborers [...]. Plantation-like çiftlik consisted of a whole village [...].
As far as socioeconomic features of the new çiftlik were concerned, the following definition is given.
The çiftlik; Stoianovich says "mark the transition from a social and economic structure founded upon a system of moderate land rent and few labor service to one of excessive land rent and exaggerate service."
Stoianovich also adds taht sharecroppring with fields, transportation, and other service supplement the rent given to the landlord labeling this development as "internal colonialism".
[...]
Furthermore, he draws attention to the fact that the expansion of the çiftlik system was interrelated with the growing demand of the European market for the agricultural products of the Ottoman Empire. For example, cotton was the main staple for export from the Serez plain in Macedonia , where some three hundred village were divided among several ayans by the last decade of the 18th century.
Landholding and Commercial Agriculture in the Middle East, by Çağlar Keyder,Faruk Tabak
This building could add incomes and production bonus but happiness malus.
Original message (French)
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
« Le courage, c’est de ne pas subir la loi du mensonge triomphant qui passe, et de ne pas faire écho de notre âme, de notre bouche et de nos mains aux applaudissements imbéciles et aux huées fanatiques.. » Jean JAURES
Miles
Re: The Ottoman Empire - Gameplay Discussion
Im having an issue with this mid basically my ottoman army now has green uniform s instead of red ?
Unguibus et Rostro
Re: The Ottoman Empire - Gameplay Discussion
Some informations about Tugs from Goutard :
Tuğ, reading To as ğ is not pronounciated, is a Turkic emblem dating from Central Asia Turks period.
Legend tell that a turk having loose his sancak (sanjak = flag), he had used his horse tail, tying it to a spear.
Even if Tug is an old item, it had been used from the Ottoman and Seljuk period up until Mahmud II (1784-1839).
Tugs were approximatively 3 meters height.
They were used to highlight the rank of their owners.
Sultan (but not only as Gengis Khan use it too) put 9 tugs in his palace before to start a campaign. These 9 tugs were the symbol of the 9 skys and 9 regions from the old pagan Turkic beliefs.
On the battlefield, Tugs were used by units to show their position and numbers as well as flags.
As a personal experience [Goutlard], in documentaries as well as in reenactments, Tugs were bore by Jannissary officiers. This could explain why the use of Tug had became obsolete during Mahmud II reign as he is the Ottoman ruler who had disbanded Janissaries and try to take away all symbols and rituals tied to this military corps.
At least 3 types of tugs existed :
- Hücum Tug : assault tug
- Tug
- Tuğ-ı Hümâyun : Sultan's Tug, only used inside his Palace in time of war during ETW period
About musicians and music intruments, a Mehters (musician of Janissaries) "team" was composed of :
- a Corbaci (Jannisary officer) bearing Tug
- several Sancakbasi (flagbearers)
- 9 Mehters (musicians) for Sultan's regiments
- 7 Mehters for Great Vizir regiments
In time of peace, Mehters served only as musicians.
In time of war, they helped to set up Sultan's tent too.
Example : assault march
Mehters' instruments :
- Nakkare (same type as Kudüm)
- Mehter Zili (Cymbals)
- Mehter Zurnasi (Flute)
- Trumpet (late use)
- Mehter Davulu (Mehter's drum)
- Bakir Kös (larger brass drum)
- Ahsap Kös (wood drum)
Original message from Goutlard :
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Some pictures :
And the Tug I've created :
Last edited by wangrin; August 26, 2013 at 01:55 PM.
« Le courage, c’est de ne pas subir la loi du mensonge triomphant qui passe, et de ne pas faire écho de notre âme, de notre bouche et de nos mains aux applaudissements imbéciles et aux huées fanatiques.. » Jean JAURES
Unguibus et Rostro
Re: The Ottoman Empire - Gameplay Discussion
Some more new informations from Goutlard (please +rep him) :
Goutlard has done new researched about Janissaries and Sipahis fighting style and weaponry during the 18th century.
- Janissaries :
- weaponry :
Jannisaries were free to choose their weapons. Matchlock musket, flintlock musket or even bow were of common use contrary to some descriptions.
People can find weapons of all sizes, from Jezail to modern musket (having a shorter range).
- organisation :
Army was organized in Ortas (equivalent to a division), composed of thousand of soldiers.
Compared to European armies, the officers/soldiers ration was lower.
If most of regiments fought without real order (column, chaotic fighting and no volley fire), some others used the volley fire.
Soldiers had often a better individual training compare to European ones, and they had access to the best equipments and weapons from the Empire.
But, orders were long to be executed, and soldiers fought in a "feudal" manner.
Due to normal Janissary training (and not "false" Janissaries such as provincial ones), they were still feared and rightly considered as elite unit through Europe.
It is necessary to differentiate "true" and "false" Janissaries.
True Janissaries, or Kapikulu Janissaries (slaves of the Porte), were Sultan's slaves and have kept their training level.
False Janissaries, forming Yerliye were provincial "Janissaries" and were not tied to the Sultan.
Janissary's Börk (typical Janissary hat) was still common during the 18th century.
Janissaries were Bektashism follower, this means they were allowed to drink alcohol, but not to eat pig.
- possible roster for Jannisaries :
- Yerliye Janissaries (provincial Janissaries) : musket or bow armed provincial infantry, less efficient than line infantry, training inferior to average one.
- Ceemat Janissaries / Yaya Janissaries : Ceemat means "people" and Yaya means "pedestrian" (foot), both names are correct for this type of unit. Well trained, they have access to good weapons (bows or musket) but are not discipled troops.
- Sekban Janissaries : Sekban means "guard of dog". Similar to Ceemat, it could be interesting to give bow to one of them and musket to the other.
- Ağa Janissaries : Ağa means "chief". They are the best Janissary units, the best trained and had access to the best weapons, but lack discipline.
- Sipahis :
Sipahis still used medium and heavy armors at this time.
They still wore helmets, from light armoured ones through misiurka (helmet used by Isarelys in Vanilla game) to heavier migfer.
Timariot Sipahis (feudal Sipahis) able to afford it, still wore chainmails and armors composed of mails and plates as they would prefer wear a good defensive equipment, even if not really efficient.
Sultan's guards (often called Kapicilu, even if the word isn't exact) still wore the chainmail with golden colored plates that were typicall of these units.
These armors were a good protection during melee and against arrows but were less efficient than cuirass against bullet, even in area protected by metal plates.
- Tug :
It seems that Tug and Sançak can be use for Janisarries, both being historically accurate.
It's the reason why using Tug seems to be a god idea to create diversity, instead of always use flag (Sançak).
Original message :
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
« Le courage, c’est de ne pas subir la loi du mensonge triomphant qui passe, et de ne pas faire écho de notre âme, de notre bouche et de nos mains aux applaudissements imbéciles et aux huées fanatiques.. » Jean JAURES
Libertus
Re: The Ottoman Empire - Gameplay Discussion
maybe some janissaries with blunderbusses or looted Austrian double muskets to act as an assault force. I also remember reading that carbines were popular with the Sekban in later years.
Unguibus et Rostro
Re: The Ottoman Empire - Gameplay Discussion
We have to limit the number of unit in recruitment queue, so, we will not create a Janissary unit with blunderbusses,, an other with muskets and an other with bows.
We have to find an other solution.
What is possible, is to create equipments that look different.
Example : muskets of different origin and size.
It is possible as long as all use the same animation.
What is not possible is to mix bow and muskets.
Some new informations from Goutlard :
Topkapi palace museum : weapons
- Composite bows :
Well made bows.
It would seem that master archers would have been able to send an arrow up to 700m. Normal range was up to 200m, using massive salvoes.
- Flintlock muskets :
Heavily ornamented with gems and gilts.
- Matchlock muskets :
All matchlock musket shown in Topkapi were from the 17th century, none were from the 18th one.
- 18th century musket :
Un-ornamented muskets.
- Kiliç sword :
Also known as saber.
- Yatagan sword :
Janissaries' weapon, known to be difficult to learn to handle it but also known to be diffiult to block by the opponent.
Vienna Museum : Turkey section
Armours from the siege of Vienna (1683).
Infantry uniforms shown used light armors as most of the cavalry.
Armours were of 3 types :
Sipahis :
Battle of Vienna (1683) :
It seems that most of the army didn't wore armours.
Sipahis from the guard as well as from Timar wore armours and were armed with lance and sword, lance being used during charge and Sipahis switching to sword for melee.
Characters :
- Baltaci Mehmet :
Grand Vizir from 1704 to 1706 and from 1709 to 1712, date of his death.
Known for having fought against Russia and having defeating Russian at the battle of Prut. The threaty of Prut allow Ottoman to recover Azov. (Don Voisko region from ETW)- Silahdar Damat Ali Pasha :
General and Grand Vizir.
Known as a good general, he is became Grand Vizir in 1713.
In 1714, he launch an attack against Morée and succesfully win the war : few fightings, fast victory.
He died at the battle of Petrovaradin (1715), a major defeat for Ottoman against Austrians.- Limberakis Gerakaris guilty of treason against the Ottoman Empire, this characters was rotting in prison. So, he should not appears in ETW.
Government (Divan):
- Faction Leader : Padisha
- Head of government : Sadrazam (Grand Vizir)
- Finances : Defterdar
- Justice : Şeyhülislam
- Army : Serasker
- Navy : Kaptan-I-Derya
Last edited by wangrin; October 13, 2013 at 04:43 AM.
« Le courage, c’est de ne pas subir la loi du mensonge triomphant qui passe, et de ne pas faire écho de notre âme, de notre bouche et de nos mains aux applaudissements imbéciles et aux huées fanatiques.. » Jean JAURES
Janissary
Re: The Ottoman Empire - Gameplay Discussion
Note that Topkapi Palace's weapons are those that equipped Kapikulu soldiers, such as Janissaries, Kapikulu Sipahis ; it is likely that such quality firearms was not being used by lower quality soldiers.
I agree that there shouldn't be tons of clone units with little difference in stats such as in Darthmod. It overloads the recruitment queue and makes some units impossible to train. Well, possible to create equipments that look different ? Then giving musket stats, but arming with standard muskets, rifles and blunderbusses to represent the weaponry diversity is possible ?We have to limit the number of unit in recruitment queue, so, we will not create a Janissary unit with blunderbusses,, an other with muskets and an other with bows.
We have to find an other solution.
What is possible, is to create equipments that look different.
Example : muskets of different origin and size.
It is possible as long as all use the same animation.
What is not possible is to mix bow and muskets.
I saw in the shogun II forum a mixed-animation unit called "Strategist Hero" or something such. Maybe it is possible to mix animations ? I'm trying to find it.
Example : Shogun 2 Yari & Katana animation : http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...ing-animations
Shogun 2 Cavalry switch yari/katana : http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...ing-Animations
Last edited by Goutlard; October 13, 2013 at 09:17 AM.
Wind from the East's Awards :
Libertus
Re: The Ottoman Empire - Gameplay Discussion
what about bows for the ceemats, matchlocks for sekban, jezzails for yerliye, and flintlocks for aga (and perhaps even the ability to throw grenades). this gives some nice diversity and gives each a clear role. While it might not be the most historical roster it meets the requirements of economy of units.
Unguibus et Rostro
Re: The Ottoman Empire - Gameplay Discussion
As long as all of them use same animations and no bayonet, yes, it is possible.Originally Posted by Goutlard
Of course, stats will be the same for all weapons.
I don't exactly understand what they have done, so I will try to have a look to their pack file.
I suppose they use primary/secondary weapon system, but don't understand what they have done to allow a mix of primary and secondary weapon in melee.
So, i'm not sure it is possible to do the same with Janissaries, mostly because primary weapon is a firearm when secondary weapon is a cold steel one.
Last edited by wangrin; October 21, 2013 at 03:25 PM.
« Le courage, c’est de ne pas subir la loi du mensonge triomphant qui passe, et de ne pas faire écho de notre âme, de notre bouche et de nos mains aux applaudissements imbéciles et aux huées fanatiques.. » Jean JAURES
Janissary
Re: The Ottoman Empire - Gameplay Discussion
At least it might proove that it is possible to make lancers use sword after charging
Wind from the East's Awards :
Janissary
Re: The Ottoman Empire - Gameplay Discussion
Time to ask a question. What is the plan with the Crimean Khanate and the Barbary States ? Will they be kept separate knowing that they are plagues that prevent the Ottoman Player from making peace (as they do not end wars at the same time as the Ottomans), making alliances and worsening relationships (Barbary States) ?
Wind from the East's Awards :
Unguibus et Rostro
Re: The Ottoman Empire - Gameplay Discussion
Historically, Barbary States as well as Crimean Khanate were still quasi-independant, particularly true for Barbary States.
Crimean Khanate could be a vassal of the Ottoman Empire, but it's more difficult with Barbary States.
So, we will keep them as factions.
But we will have a big work on their CAI characters to avoid them to behave inaccurately.
« Le courage, c’est de ne pas subir la loi du mensonge triomphant qui passe, et de ne pas faire écho de notre âme, de notre bouche et de nos mains aux applaudissements imbéciles et aux huées fanatiques.. » Jean JAURES
Janissary
Re: The Ottoman Empire - Gameplay Discussion
Indeed I have to agree. I don't know if it is entirelly true but I did read somewhere that some micro-colonialism happened in North Africa, European Factions trying to conquer parts of the Barbary States but getting repelled in the 18th Century (Not talking about later
Just to add something, an anecdote that did stun me when I was researching for ER : A country was called Devlet el Tukiye (Türkiye Devleti, Country of Turkey) and it was not the Ottoman Empire. It was the Mamluk Sultanate as Mamelukes were mostly Kipçak Turks. http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meml%C3...B1%C4%9F%C4%B1
Not much interest, but really fascinating. Knowing that the Ottoman Empire was never named Turkey by Ottomans, only by foreigners and was called Devlet-i Aliye-i Osmaniye (Great Nation of Osman).
Last edited by Goutlard; November 12, 2013 at 04:12 PM.
Wind from the East's Awards :
Unguibus et Rostro
Re: The Ottoman Empire - Gameplay Discussion
About Ottoman Empire, we will have two emerging factions : Egypt's Mamelukes and Baghdad ones.
If you have any informations about them, I will be interested.
Theoretically, both were vassal-like of the Porte, but acted as independent factions.
« Le courage, c’est de ne pas subir la loi du mensonge triomphant qui passe, et de ne pas faire écho de notre âme, de notre bouche et de nos mains aux applaudissements imbéciles et aux huées fanatiques.. » Jean JAURES
Janissary
Re: The Ottoman Empire - Gameplay Discussion
Mamelukes in Egypt :
The closest we can get to the Egypt's Mamelukes is the Khedivate of Egypt (1867 : near independence , 67 years after the end of the ETW game). It was founded by Mehmet Ali Pasa, following the defeat of Napoleon in Ottoman territory. Despite having a near-independence that late, the problem began earlier for the Ottomans. Indeed many uprisings took place in the 1790s, willing to restore the Sultanate. The 1789 french campaign in Egypt caused more chaos than help. It caused three civil wars in less than a decade and previous Mameluke leaders were executed. Mehmet Ali Pasa took profit of this situation to become the Vâli (ruler) of Egypt and did proclaim the unrecognized independence in 1805. He did believe the Ottoman Empire was near it's complete fall and that Egypt will be it's great successor.
He was a good general and a good leader. He knew the problems caused by Ottoman policies and modernized the ruling system in Egypt. A constitutional monarchy was established, meanwhile more focus was given on education and research, especially in medicine ; taking as an example the Muslim Empire. During his rule, Egypt opened more and more it's borders for trade with European nations.
It would be very interesting to script some chaos in Egypt, revolution attempts in the 1790s.
Mamelukes in Iraq :
Irakli Memlükler in Turkish. The rule of Mustafa II harmed the Ottoman control in Iraq. Indeed he was quite uninterested about the affairs of the state. It was mainly his Sadrazam (grand vizier) that leaded the Ottoman Empire Köprülü Hüseyin Pasa. The Sadrazam was a reformer and modernized the feudal system, tried to reduce the power of the Janissaries and Sipahis. It did indeed succeed but caused large political instability in the Ottoman Empire. This led to Janissary revolts causing him to be put down. Mustafa II died in 1703 (I would nearly say thankfully reading how he led the Empire...) and Ahmet III took power. He was a remarkably good leader, militarily but mainly economically accordingly to historical sources as under his rule parts of Persia and Russia (Azov) were conquered meanwhile the Austro-Turkish war was given up. He did fix the Ottoman finances quite well without over taxation which seemed rather difficult.
Despite a relatively stable rule, a Georgian dynasty did take power in Iraq in 1704. They did control Iraq nearly as an independent country from the Ottoman Empire which did indeed not please the Sultan. They founded a Pasalik (Emirate in arabic) as in the Barbary states. The most significant leader of the Iraqi Mamelukes was Büyük Süleyman Pasa (Soliman the Great.. Sounds like Soliman the magnificent). Iraqi Pasas mainly tried to keep control and enhance their territory, sometimes fighting the Ottomans, sometimes looking like their are going to resign in a nearly schizophrenic way. Not much reforms were made until the very last leaders meanwhile an elite corps of guards was established : Gürcistan Memlük Muhafızları the Mameluke Guards of Georgia that did serve in Iraq.
--
To come back to the point of protectorates, I think we really need peace treaties that lead your protectorates to make peace too.
Reading about the Ottoman Timar System and the situation in the 18th Century, I came to think that the Ottoman Empire should not have ruined regions or very poor economy as in Empire Total War. (Especially in Istanbul. Seriously it was quite an important point for trading, and a prosperous route meanwhile now in Empire Total War it looks like a poor and undevelopable region as there are few towns). It should instead have too many expanses with a feudal system that causes high tax inefficiency due to a decentralized system. It's modernization should cause political trouble.
And about Anatolia. Ankara was nearly not a town in ETW era. It had such a low population back then ; nearly not enough to even considered be considered a city. It was indeed a market town (Bourgade). Even in 1910 it's population was not over 15 000, and it did grow only thanks to Ataturk. An accurate capital city for this region would be Bursa. It was one of the first ottoman cities in history and the early Ottoman capital city and the most important city in Anatolia and the second city with the most architecture works in the Ottoman Empire after Istanbul. I do think it is more appropriate to make it capital of Anatolia rather than Ankara.
Last edited by Goutlard; November 13, 2013 at 05:50 PM.
Wind from the East's Awards :
Janissary
Re: The Ottoman Empire - Gameplay Discussion
A Minor update, correction of an info : The yerliyye Janissaries ; it is more correct languague wise to call them yerli. Yerliyye means "beloging to the place of" so yerliye janissaries make absolute non sense whereas Yerli Janissaries mean Local Janissaries.
Wind from the East's Awards :
Unguibus et Rostro
Re: The Ottoman Empire - Graphics Discussion
« Le courage, c’est de ne pas subir la loi du mensonge triomphant qui passe, et de ne pas faire écho de notre âme, de notre bouche et de nos mains aux applaudissements imbéciles et aux huées fanatiques.. » Jean JAURES
Re: The Ottoman Empire - Information & Discussion
Who are these Sekhben Musketeers? They seem to cost the same as Janissaries but lower stats
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
